The Missing Evidence - New Ripper Documentary

[Sally]

Say Cheese [knife]

So many of these old photos convey how the protographed ones were in awe about the new invention that could portray them in a split second, and the respect they felt towards the magician behind the lens is normally very evident.

But look at Lechmere! Who is in command in THAT photo...? Is HE impressed by the camera and photographer? Not as far as I can tell ...

Anyone else getting that? No?

[jmenges]

New invention?

Does the photo pre-date the Ripper murders?

JM

[Trevor Marriott]

Chris:
I sort of assumed that meant Berner Street was on the way from Doveton Street to Cable Street ...

It matters very little if Berner Street was on the way from Doveton Street to Cable Street. Chris. Stride was killed at around 00.45-1.00, so we can safely assume that if Lechmere did it, then he was not on his way TO but instead FROM his mothers, in all probability. If he was ever there that night. He could equally have had a number of aquaintances living in the Berner Street area where he had lived for many years.

I am not locked to a specific scenario on this. It was his old stomping ground, he had left it only three months earlier, and he would reasonably have had plenty of ties to it. The connection is there, well established.

Gareth Norris suggested a sort of trauma coupled to a visit to his mothers as a possibility. If we work from that, he may have gone to his motherīs (via whichever way he chose to), and then there may have been some disagreement, and he may have left in anger, walking the miniscule route up to his old haunts, drunk in a pub, walked out and found Stride.

It is all very easy and completely plausible and it fits eminently with Norrisīsuggestion.

Letīs not make it harder than it is. Surely you would not want to do that?

Tell me, were all those routes shown in those fancy animations in the documentary constructed on the same principle? If so, no wonder the one from James Street to Broad Street went through Mitre Square!

No they were not constructed on the same principle - his mother lived in one place only. And the way from James Street to Broad Street did not go through Mitre Square. But it passed St Botolphīs, a place where it was common knowledge that prostitution abounded. So he may have walked there, found Eddowes, struck a deal and ended up in Mitre Square. Similarly, he may have searched the streets in the area for victims - not only St Botolphs held prostitutes.

See? Once again all those misgivings on your behalf for no reason at all, Chris. You really need to look more at the possibilities and abandon these pessimistic takes of yours.

Oh - and I kept meaning to ask - wouldn't one o'clock in the morning be a bit of an odd time for Cross/Lechmere to be visiting his domineering old mum?

Well, we know that if Lechmere killed Stride at 1.00 or shortly before, he would not have been visiting his mum at the exact same time. So the suggestion is an impossible one.
He could well, however, have visited her BEFORE that hour, then left to have a drink at one of his old joints and then arrived in Berner Street.

He is tied to the area, like it or not. That is what matters.

His mum lived close by, like it or not. That is what matters.

The Berner Street murder happens directly inbetween his old addresses in the area, like it or not. That is what matters.

But that is of course just a few more coincidences, right?

Next, please!

Fisherman

As I said before coincidences are not what convict people

Isnt it for the experts to support you case. You now appear to be tailoring your case the other way round with Norris`s comments as above.

[Chris]

Anyone else getting that? No?

He just looks a bit sad to me. Maybe he was gifted with precognition.

[Robert]

For all we know he's thinking "How can I smile with these piles?"

[GUT]

And of course when he went to visit his mum he left hs wife and kids at home, it all makes sense now.

[Lechmere]

When reinvestigating the Whitechapel Murders it is sensible to be open minded about other unsolved murders of a similar character that took place in London, say ten or fifteen years either side of 1888. If this is doubted then that is the doubters problem not mine.

I can see how Lechmere can potentially be linked to some of these crimes, through their location being near places where he would have cause to be familiar. This again is a sensible manner in which to proceed.
Some people seem to think they have some sort of status that allows them to demand that a list of these crimes be produced. They can do their own research for now.

If Lechmere was visiting his mother on the night of the double events, he will have gone there somewhat earlier than 1 am. He may have left quite a bit earlier than 1 am and gone for a drink in a pub or as Christer says, bearing in mind he had lived in that vicinity virtually all his life he may have just been visiting friends all night.
The fact remains he had strong associations with the area around Berner Street.
But need he have ‘picked up’ Stride in Berner Street. While she seems to have been seen there at various times that night it does not appear to be the case that she was there the whole time. She probably walked about a bit in neighbouring streets.
Similarly if Lechmere was looking for a victim he may have diverted from the straightest route home.
The suggestion that there was a meeting between Lechmere and Stride in the vicinity of Berner Street and her taking him to Duffields Yard for an assignation is not in the least troubled by the somewhat irrelevant quibbles posted on here.
And why need he have taken his wife and kids with him? As if that is a killer blow?

[Sally]

Sigh...

When reinvestigating the Whitechapel Murders it is sensible to be open minded about other unsolved murders of a similar character that took place in London, say ten or fifteen years either side of 1888. If this is doubted then that is the doubters problem not mine.

Some people would disagree with you there; some wouldn't - depends on their ideas. I don't personally have a problem with the idea - and I wasn't questioning its validity.

I can see how Lechmere can potentially be linked to some of these crimes, through their location being near places where he would have cause to be familiar. This again is a sensible manner in which to proceed.

Ah yes - 'Potentially'. I think I know what you mean, Ed.

Unfortunately, unless you have any evidence that can 'tie' Crossmere to any murders on either side of 1888 his geographical whereabouts is irrelevant. If you insist on building conjecture on top of conjecture, you will have only yourself to blame for the consequences. Already I can see it in what you say - 'their location being near places where he would have cause to be familiar' How do you know where he would have cause to be familiar? Is it a guess based on the routes that you imagine he would have taken in his daily life?

Mind you, I did have Fisherman telling me that Crossmere was definitely selling goods in Broadway Market at some point so that's probably a clincher - well I assume so, anyway, since when I asked for clarification he adopted a clandestine air.... something about it being top secret because it was going in your book, I think...

I may reserve judgement on that one for now.

Some people seem to think they have some sort of status that allows them to demand that a list of these crimes be produced. They can do their own research for now.

*

Nonsense. What 'Some people' actually think that is that when an argument, premise or claim is clearly stated as such it should be supported with evidence.

I have asked 'Team Lechmere' for clarification in response to claims that Crossmere can be 'tied' to earlier and later murders. I have asked for clarification on receiving typically vague and 'woolly' responses. It is entirely to be expected, I'm afraid, that you will be called to account for what appears to be nothing more than grandstanding.

But no matter - I assume that the reality of the situation to be that you are unable to address the question of Crossmere's alleged involvement with murders outside 1888. If your research is in progress and you are as yet unsure of the outcome it might be better just to say so and save yourself the trouble of these tedious exchanges.


*P.S. - Research Crossmere?? Oh dear....

[Lechmere]

Tedious for you Sally perhaps - I made it fairly plain I'm not going to discuss the matter.

[Robert]

That row with his mother/daughter that supposedly triggered the murder must have been a serious matter if a convivial evening spent in the cheerful company of old friends failed to allay his anger. It puts me in mind of a story Lamb told of a schoolmaster of his who cried "I've a good mind to give you a fearful thrashing!" The schoolmaster was then called from the classroom for a few minutes. On his return he exclaimed "And I will!"

[Sally]

Tedious for you Sally perhaps - I made it fairly plain I'm not going to discuss the matter.

Ok - off you run, then

[Ben]

Just to get some perspective here, the so-called "close" proximity of the Stride murder scene to Crossmere's mum's house is actually a greater distance than that between the Victoria Home and THREE murder scenes.

I mean, if that's what it takes to create a "strong association"...

[Fisherman]

Fisherman

So why the **** did you post that nonsense about going from Doveton Street to Cable Street via Berner Street?

Kindly bear in mind that most of us don't have as much time on our hands as you evidently do.

If you want to believe that Lechmere being the killer is totally dependent on him having gone to visit his mother on the night Stride and Eddowes died, you may need to reconsider things. It is something that can be suggested, since his mother lived nearby Berner Street.

But I think you must realize that we cannot work from the idea as if it was a fact. Lechmere cound have had a million reasons to seek out the area on that night. Thatīs what happens when you have an area where you have spent many years, during which time you were shaped as a personality.

It is only reasonable to suggest that if he frequented pubs, for example, then the pubs he visited would have been chosen in this exact area. And there is equally reason to believe that he would have been aquainted to people who had made the same choice of pub, and that he would make it his business to revisit such haunts on his night off.

Why would we lock ourselves to one given scenario only, with him visiting his mothers, when what we have is a general connection to an area?

As for spending time out here, you have a free choice, just as I have, Chris. If you feel I am wasting your time when I will not adjust to and accept a suggestion of a locked scenario, then there is nothing forcing you to reply, is there?

All the best,
Fisherman

[Chris]

Fisherman

I don't wish to be rude, but do you have some sort of reading difficulty?

[Fisherman]

As I said before coincidences are not what convict people

Isnt it for the experts to support you case. You now appear to be tailoring your case the other way round with Norris`s comments as above.

I donīt mind whether we speak of Norris, Scobie or Griffiths. It s not as if any of them are opposed to the Lechmere theory, is it?

And "coincidences" do convict people - when there are too may of them. Scobie had a lot to say about "coincidences", but that didnīt make it into the documentary other than when he says that "when the coincidences mount up - and they DO in his case..."

True coincidences do not convict people. But the coincidence of having tried out your new gun twenty seconds before a man, shot to death, is found on the floor beside you, tends to look bad. You may claim that it was a coincidence, and you may get away with it, if lucky. But there is no way that you can pile up too many coincidences and have a jury believe you.

You know that as well as I do, Trevor.

The best,
Fisherman